Rick Perry said Wednesday that he was sorry for saying at last week's Republican debate that those opposed to providing an in-state tuition break to the children of illegal immigrants "did not have a heart.""...violate the property rights of those who owned land on the border." Ha! Good one. Perry seems never to have heard of eminent domain, nor with his Chamber of Commerce mentality does he believe that securing the border is more important than protecting private landowners - likely including many wealthy people, oil companies, and so on - on the border.
“I was probably a bit over-passionate by using that word and it was inappropriate,” Perry said in a interview with Newsmax. “In Texas in 2001 we had 181 members of the legislature — only four voted against this piece of legislation — because it wasn’t about immigration it was about education.”
But Perry stood by his argument that building a fence along the entire Mexican border was unwise. The Texas governor said that the fence would likely be expensive, ineffective and violate the property rights of those who owned land on the border.
He also excuses his support for in-state tuition for children of illegal immigrants by the fact that quite a few of his fellow Texas legislators are all for open borders too.
“In the metropolitan areas where the fencing actually can play a positive role, absolutely,” he said. “But you have to have boots on the ground … having an obstacle without observation is no obstacle at all. So just the idea of building a fence and saying, ‘That will take care of it, let’s just build a fence,’ has never worked in the history of mankind.”Plus, he's a defeatist who believes that those he's speaking to are morons.
Perry is toast, which is just as well, because Texas politicians can't be trusted.
Ha. Ask the Texan landowners if they'd like a fence along their land. Just ask.
ReplyDeleteHas he asked "those who own land on the border" how they feel? Because from what I've read they are literally being killed as things stand and would like nothing better than a wall to protect them.
ReplyDeleteI voted for Perry for governor over KBH; I would not support him as president. His apology doesn't negate his underlying, gut emotion: that he's doing the right thing, and we are being unreasonable. I am a single-issue voter and demography is destiny. No open borders, no magic negroes, no slick mormon businessmen. I'm sitting this one out.
ReplyDeleteThe very fact that he employed the word "inappropriate" shows he's been captured by the feminist left. Real men never use that word. I've paid zero attention to this guy, but I suspect he's a secret poof.
ReplyDeleteSo if he hadn't been swept away by his tsunami of passion what words would he have chosen instead?
ReplyDeleteI'm glad he apologized as his remark must certainly have devastated those on the receiving end, leaving them reeling in anguish and pain. Let the healing begin.
"I’m beginning to believe that the pro-immigration, pro-war Rick Perry is the worst of all possible GOP hopefuls. Sure, Romney is bad, but the only thing that Romney is ideologically in favor of is Romney, which means that he might bend to grassroots pressure if he sees it as securing his base. Perry, however, like Bush and Obama, is a true believer, a true believer in the invade-the-world / invite-the-world mantra."
ReplyDeletehttp://conservativetimes.org/?p=10034
Romney, is both insider and outsider. He's rich, born to riches, the son of a governor, Bain Capital, and all that. But ... as a Mormon he's untouchable and always will be. He could be elected President twice ... and the elite would always despise him. Because he is a Mormon. A taint that can never come off for them.
ReplyDeleteSo unlike Bush, or Perry, who ARE insiders, elites, part of the Ivy smart set, Romney will never be that. Any more than Santorum, the smart Catholic kid, could be. Or Rudy (too Italian).
You want a guy who you figure if he wins, will have so many natural inabilities to be part of the elite, he'll have to stick with the people. You want as much tension and even hatred between him and the elites as possible, so he turns to the people, as no President has done since Truman. Since Palin is not electable, a Mormon will suffice. They'll hate a Mormon nearly as much as Palin, and thus Romney would need to placate the base all the time. [The Insider establishment hates Romney too, apparently, hence the wooing of Chris Christie who is awful as the anti-Romney candidate.]
‘That will take care of it, let’s just build a fence,’ has never worked in the history of mankind.”
ReplyDeleteIf this were true, then the nation-state could not exist because the nation-state depends on the ability to define and defend the state's borders. Obviously this is not true, since states have existed for centuries and have successfully defended their borders throughout that time.
In other words, shut up, moron.
Many of the pro immigration/illegals arguments are 'appeals to emotion', and Perry's remark was just another.
ReplyDeleteThe problem with that is we don't just have a relatively few illegals for whom we easily could, and at least from a Christian perspective probably should (not that I'm a big Christian, but Christianity is also part of our heritage), make exceptions. We have millions of illegals, so many that the basic demography of the country is being changed: 'It's basically over for Anglos in Texas'. So a line has to be drawn. Enough is enough.
Next. OK, Hermann, you're up.
ReplyDeleteSo just the idea of building a fence and saying, ‘That will take care of it, let’s just build a fence,’ has never worked in the history of mankind.”
ReplyDeleteNever? In all mankind's history? A fence worked pretty well in Berlin, along with vicious dogs and border guards armed with sub machine guns.
Also, any CEO caught knowingly hiring an illegal should have to serve guard duty along the border, living in a tent and eating MREs for a year or two. That would immediately solve the problem. But then too many Republican business owners might have to alter their lifestyle, so we can't have that.
A people must have political will. It's that simple.
Krauthammer on illegal immigration: complete the fence and use the unemployed
ReplyDeleteSo Perry thinks everyone has forgotten his enthusiasm for the Trans Texas Corridor?
ReplyDeleteChicago: "I'm glad he apologized as his remark must certainly have devastated those on the receiving end, leaving them reeling in anguish and pain. Let the healing begin"
ReplyDeleteGood point. He doesn't get that the objection is to his stance, not his words.
The Texas governor said that the fence would likely be expensive, ineffective and violate the property rights of those who owned land on the border.
ReplyDeleteUnlike the Trans Texas Corridor. . .
[defunct, I believe]
"So unlike Bush, or Perry, who ARE insiders, elites, part of the Ivy smart set..."
ReplyDeletePerry's not Ivy League, and he's definitely not part of the smart set.
"I'm sitting this one out."
Romney is numerate and has a track record of success (balancing the budget in MA, fixing the SLC Olympics, building Bain Capital). He's also not a Chamber of Commerce Republican -- he invested and turned around companies that were too big, for the most part, to risk hiring illegals (e.g. Staples). He'd be better on everything, including immigration, than Obama. Sitting out the election is stupid. You'll never have a perfect candidate to vote for. Vote for the best available option. It makes a difference.
I guess Romney is the best we can do. Perry is self-destructing over the immigration issue and is looking more and more like a Bush clone. Paul has good economic ideas but is even worse than Perry on immigration. Bachmann has no chance. Cain might be a good VP pick. So I guess we're stuck with Romney.
ReplyDeleteGiven the exceptional weakness of the economy, Obama's prospects look bleak. The Senate is likely to go Republican next year, and if the GOP'ers can hang on to the House, we may have an entirely Republican government. This is both an opportunity and a danger. An opportunity, because it will give the Republicans to show what they can do about the numerous problems we're facing, mostly economic ones. A danger, because if we end up with another RINO government like we had the last time the Republicans were in control, we're doomed.
"smead jolley said...
ReplyDeleteThe very fact that he employed the word "inappropriate" shows he's been captured by the feminist left. Real men never use that word."
I agree. It's the sort of word a second-grade teacher uses to scold an obstreperous pupil. And, as others have pointed out, it wasn't his words we object to, it's his belief that we owe Mexicans who come here a single damned thing.
Somewhat related to this topic, here's yet another story about those vibrant, hard-working people of Mexico:
http://www.nbcmiami.com/news/weird/Bag-of-Severed-Heads-Left-Near-Mexican-School-130701343.html
They're the hardest working decapitators anywhere. We should thank the Mexicans for bringing vibrant phrases like "bag of severed heads" into common usage. And, thanks to Rick Perry, the future severed-head-bags of Texas will be full of a much more educated kind of head.
Sheila said: His apology doesn't negate his underlying, gut emotion: that he's doing the right thing, and we are being unreasonable. I am a single-issue voter and demography is destiny. No open borders, no magic negroes, no slick mormon businessmen. I'm sitting this one out.
ReplyDeleteRicardo said: He'd be better on everything, including immigration, than Obama. Sitting out the election is stupid. You'll never have a perfect candidate to vote for. Vote for the best available option. It makes a difference.
I'm with Sheila on the primacy of the immigration issue (get that issue wrong, and you are utterly disqualified), but I'm with Ricardo on voting for the best available option.
Perry is like a cross between Jorge Bush and McCain. In other words, God-awful and utterly disqualified. Romney would be much better than Obama on every issue I can think of.
My first choice for President would be Tom Tancredo. But that's not going to happen.
ReplyDeletePerry looks disturbingly like Bush II. (Or is it Bush III?)
Romney seems to be the best compromise between electability on the one hand and being good - or not being overtly bad - on the issues.
Agree that Romney is the best (er, least worst) candidate. I would vote for Herman Cain, except that he's supported affirmative action in the past and probably would again as POTUS.
ReplyDeleteUnlike the Trans Texas Corridor. . .
ReplyDelete[defunct, I believe]
I saw construction in progress just last month.